Do You Challenge Queue-Jumpers and Line-Cutters?
Queuing (or 'standing in line' for Americans) is time wasted, part of our lives flushed down the toilet. Just like other everyday activities - grocery shopping, teeth brushing and washing-up - queuing is necessary but tedious, hard to take pleasure in.
This is a shame because over a lifetime we spend about four years queuing (hopefully not all in one go). That's more, on average, than we spend shopping, exercising, cooking or driving. What we need is a way of coping with queuing, a distraction of some kind. One answer comes from psychologist Stanley Milgram, famous for his work on obedience in social psychology: study the queue itself.
Excuse me, I'd like to get in here
Milgram considered the queue a classic example of how groups of people automatically create social order out of chaos. But this social order can be fragile when faced with chaotic threats, like that of the queue-jumper. Suddenly we have a social psychology experiment on our hands: how fragile is this spontaneous social order and what will people do to protect it? In the answer to this seemingly mundane question may lie an important truth about our behaviour in groups.Early research found that people were strangely reluctant to challenge queue-jumpers, suggesting our spontaneous social order is fairly week. But this wasn't a properly designed experiment and so Milgram set about testing people's reactions to queue-jumpers using a real-life experimental study.
Milgram had assistants travel around New York to 129 different queues in betting shops, railway stations and elsewhere. At each one his experimental assistant followed a strict protocol laid down in advance:
- Enter queue at between the third and fourth person.
- Say in a neutral tone: "Excuse me, I'd like to get in here."
- Step into line and face forward.
- Only leave the queue when someone admonished them or after 1 minute, whichever was sooner.
People's responses were quite meek. On only 10% of occasions were queue-jumpers physically ejected from the line. And on only about half the occasions did anybody in the line do anything at all. Anything at all included, in this case, dirty looks or gestures as well as actual verbal objections. This seems remarkably low.
Hey, there's a line here you know!
Milgram also used two variations to find out under what conditions people would protest at queue-jumpers. The first variation was the number of intruders. Milgram found that doubling the number of jumpers almost doubled the rate of objections, which then rocketed up to 91%.A second variation involved introducing a 'buffer' person. This was another experimental confederate who was already stood in the queue legitimately. The queue-jumper did their jumping in front of them. The introduction of a buffer was to examine what people would do when they were two or three places back in the queue behind the jumper. The results showed that increasing the buffer decreased the number of objections. When there were two people between them and the queue-jumper, objections dropped to just 5%.
Too scared to question the queue-jumper?
Milgram's most interesting insights are his attempts to explain why people don't intervene. Are people just too scared? Not necessarily:- Group formation is difficult when people are stood one behind the other, all facing in the same direction. Consequently social order is weak.
- Challenging queue-jumpers could mean losing your own place in the line.
- Social systems have to tolerate some deviance otherwise they may quickly break down, i.e. a fight may start and everyone is delayed while it is sorted out.
- The line is co-opting those who threaten it by tacitly accepting them so that they gain an interest in the queue and the queue becomes stronger.
Milgram thought queue-jumping is tolerated as long as it doesn't threaten the line too much. People want to avoid social disorder because their own interests (getting served) are tied up in an orderly queue.
Coping with queuing
So the next time you're in a queue or spot a queue-jumper think about Milgram's study and how the queue might reflect society at large. If that fails it's fun to imagine the look on people's faces as Milgram's brave assistants pushed in to queues all over New York, while another watched and recorded people's reactions.Over to you: what strange behaviour have you spotted in queues and do you ever queue-jump or challenge queue-jumpers?
» This is part of a series on the psychology of the everyday.
[Image credit: butterflysha]
Like this post?
Get new articles emailed to you free (find out more...):
Subscribe to PsyBlog's RSS Feed
Bookmark this post on Del.icio.us
Stumble It!
13 comments
Depends if I am distracted with a book or not, but I may say something. Depending on my mood. Some days, I am just relaxing and don't really care. And also because I empathize with line jumpers, as I have on occasion been known to be one myself.
What do you do about an old lady with one piece of grocery in her hand asking to cut in front while sadly looking at the one item. I said "yes, of course, go ahead". Then the woman started to unload her trolly bag. I was stunned. Once in a lifetome you might say, until it happend again. The second time, I said. "Sorry but I thought you only had one item, turns out I have less items than you do. So I guess I should go first". I think there were some proud smiles from the other people in the queue, so mabye saying something about it will raise your status in the queue :-).
I think it would be very interesting to see how the results varied depending on where the study was done. I'm surprised New Yorkers had such a low rate of objection. I wonder if it would higher in the south. Or what it would be in exceptionally conformist places like Japan where often times even sexual harassment is not objected.
Cool post !
I think the cultural context has a strong role in how people behave socially.
I grew up in India, there queue-jumpers are not tolerated at all. I n fact I have seen situations where the jumper is physically ejected out from the Queue. Needless to say this slowed the whole queue !
I generally don't bother queuing in crowded places like at festivals. People are so conditioned to get in a queue to get what they want, that huge queues tend to form at the toilets, food stalls or whatever else right near the most crowded areas e.g. the main stage.
It is almost always quicker to walk a very short distance to the next set of toilets etc, where there is frequently no queue at all because so many people are so busy queuing nearby. I have almost developed a "no queuing at all" policy, even at very crowded events, because so often it's simply not necessary if one thinks a little less like a sheep.
The exception is supermarkets, where they generally don't increase their wage costs by employing a single extra till operator than they think they can get away with.
When you've invested half an hour or so getting a week's groceries together, you're very unlikely to change your mind and just walk out without buying it, so they can let the queues get almost as long as they like without losing profit.
The longest queues at my massive local Tesco are at about 11pm, when there are very few customers but they only have two or three staff on the tills.
Fun study, I'm also somewhat surprised of the weak responses in the study. Was the "linecutter" a well dressed man of normal proportions? I'll bet there is alot of variables that can alter these numbers. I would maybe say somethin if it was a man in my size who was well dressed and non threathening. I would not say anything to a big guy, gangmember, druguser or beautiful girl, probably not to any girl. Nor would I throw an old lady out, well maybe now after reading Alices post :)
well if you come to India only 10% of time or may be less than that you will find queue jumpers not getting knocked off from the queue :)
Interesting difference between people of different countries. Should ask Milgram to do study here in India and see the difference ;)
People don't say anything because they are scared of a violent response. I once stopped a guy who was pushing his way steadily along a great long queue - no-one else had said anything. He started threatening me and abusing me. Odd partly because I was younger, taller and fitter than him. But also because we were going through passport control at Heathrow! The slightest hint of actual violence and the security guys would have been swift (and there's no way he could have a weapon). He soon stopped when he saw I wasn't going to give in.
But the point is that the sort of people who push in are also the sort of people who are used to browbeating and intimidating their way through life. Usually it just isn't worth the hassle to get in their way.
The attitude of line jumpers is that they believe that they are more important than everyone else, that they have some special purpose that allows them to tromp on those who were already in line. That rules do not apply to them.
Well, it is my purpose in life to point out their mistaken assumptions. If someone jumps in my line, I guarantee they think twice before doing it again, unless they are a complete moron who doesn't learn from experience.
I too am surprised about the lack of complaints. However, having been downstate (New York city area) recently, many New Yorkers have the attitude of "if you can get away with it, go ahead and try it". One person, as the study points out, may not have an effect. As a result, it is too much work to get into an argument.
However, I find the whole situation interesting, having lived in Costa Rica in the late '80's early 90's. My experience was that "queue busters" would be ignored by both customers and clients. If you butt in line (queue jumped), you would be ignored and people would just keep pace with you in the line. Rarely would anything be said. The customer service personnel would keep track of who was next and ignore the queue jumper! This included in the bank line that could take up to 2 hours to get through.
If someone said to me "I'd like to get in here" I would say "Yes I'm sure you would, but I'd like you back there!" I lived in Orlando and stood in many a line at the parks there and there were many people that tried to jump the line. The majority of people say something there.
I wonder if the length of time one is in line or the length of the line had something to with whether people said something or not.
Perhaps those who found this article interesting might also be interested in a recent write-up by Don Norman, "The Psychology of Waiting Lines."
http://www.jnd.org/ms/Norman%20The%20Psychology%20of%20Waiting%20Lines.pdf
In South Korea, line-jumping is quite common AND frequently gets a negative response. This is a hierarchical society in which age and education gives status. The people who try to push in are generally men in their 30s and 40s. If they try to push in front of an older person, they get an earful and back off. This happens even if the older person is 3 or 4 people behind the 'insert spot.'